ReviewCancers2024
Topographic Patterns of Intracranial Meningioma Recurrences-Systematic Review with Clinical Implication.
Review in Cancers, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Modified Hemilaminectomy for Bilateral Exposure in Intramedullary Spinal Cord Tumor Resection.Brain sciences · 2026Article
- Free-hand electrode placement for intraoperative monitoring of extraocular cranial nerves in skull base surgery: preliminary experience and feasibility assessment.Neurosurgical review · 2026Observational
- Review
- Fluorescence-guided surgery combined with intraoperative photodynamic therapy for recurrent atypical and anaplastic intracranial meningiomas: a prospective feasibility study.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Neuroradiological Evaluation of Anatomo-Morphometric Arcuate Fascicle Modifications According to Different Brain Tumor Histotypes: An Italian Multicentric Study.Brain sciences · 2025Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWhile several risk factors for recurrences have been defined, the topographic pattern of meningioma recurrences after surgical resection has been scarcely investigated. The possibility of theoretically predicting the site of recurrence not only allows us to better understand the pathogenetic bases of the disease and consequently to drive the development of new targeted therapies, but also guides the decision-making process for treatment strategies and tailored follow-ups to decrease/prevent recurrence.
methodsThe authors performed a comprehensive and detailed systematic literature review of the EMBASE and MEDLINE electronic online databases regarding the topographic pattern of recurrence after surgical treatment for intracranial meningiomas. Demographics and histopathological, neuroradiological and treatment data, pertinent to the topography of recurrences, as well as time to recurrences, were extracted and analyzed.
resultsFour studies, including 164 cases of recurrences according to the inclusion criteria, were identified. All studies consider the possibility of recurrence at the previous dural site; three out of four, which are the most recent, consider 1 cm outside the previous dural margin to be the main limit to distinguish recurrences closer to the previous site from those more distant. Recurrences mainly occur within or close to the surgical bed; higher values of proliferation index are associated with recurrences close to the original site rather than within it.
conclusionsFurther studies, including genomic characterization of different patterns of recurrence, will better clarify the main features affecting the topography of recurrences. A comparison between topographic classifications of intracranial meningioma recurrences after surgery and after radiation treatment could provide further interesting information.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.